Settlement Offers Gone Wrong: Allen v Brother International Australia
In this crucial episode of P.I. Case Note, Michelle Wright analyses the Queensland Supreme Court decision in Allen v Brother International Australia Proprietary Limited [2025] QSC 129, which provides essential guidance on the validity of settlement offers under section 292(2) of the Workers’ Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2003 (Qld). The case demonstrates how even well-intentioned attempts to settle workers’ compensation claims can fail when parties don’t strictly comply with the statutory requirements for written final offers.
The court found that Mr. Allen’s offer, which included an innovative “referential acceptance” clause automatically accepting any higher counter-offer from WorkCover, was invalid under the agreed simultaneous exchange process. This decision highlights the critical importance of understanding the technical requirements for settlement offers in workers’ compensation matters. The court’s analysis reveals that when parties agree to a simultaneous exchange of compliant offers, each offer must be capable of acceptance by the other party—meaning referential or conditional offers that create uncertainty cannot form binding settlements under the statutory framework.
Listen for Michelle Wright’s expert breakdown of this important workers’ compensation decision and its implications for settlement negotiations. If you’ve been injured at work and need experienced legal guidance navigating Queensland’s complex workers’ compensation settlement process, the team at accident legal understands these technical requirements inside out. Contact us for a free consultation to ensure your settlement offers are properly structured and your rights are protected throughout the negotiation process.